Rethink the Heisman?

[garlandowl08]

If Heisman voting took place the day of the game, during the game, the day after the game and a week after the game, how do you think the voting would have changed?



Here's a link to the real voting totals, use real numbers if you feel like it. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6700005/)

[slorch]

vince doesn't need the curse anyway

[garlandowl08]

vince doesn't need the curse anyway

What are you talking about?

[stevefoxsc]

heismen voting should stay as is, it should be based on performance through the seasson and prior to bowl game's , honestly if it took place today VY.

[farmerfan]

What are you talking about?


The curse that is the heisman. Many times the winner of the heisman will go on and have a bad bowl game, some that I am reminded of are Earl Campbell in the 78 Cotton Bowl, Bo Jacksoon in the 86 Cotton Bowl, Tim Brown in the 88 Cotton Bowl, Ty Detmer in the 1990 Holiday Desmond Howard in the 92 Rose Bowl, Gino Toretta in the 93 Sugar Bowl, Chris Weinke in the 2001 Orange Bowl, Eric Crouch in the 2002 Rose Bowl and Jason White in the 2004 Sugar Bowl. I know there are many more those are just the ones that come to my mind. Usually the winner of the heisman goes on to either having a bad bowl game or losing the national championship in the bowl game.

[slorch]

The curse that is the heisman. Many times the winner of the heisman will go on and have a bad bowl game, some that I am reminded of are Earl Campbell in the 78 Cotton Bowl, Bo Jacksoon in the 86 Cotton Bowl, Tim Brown in the 88 Cotton Bowl, Ty Detmer in the 1990 Holiday Desmond Howard in the 92 Rose Bowl, Gino Toretta in the 93 Sugar Bowl, Chris Weinke in the 2001 Orange Bowl, Eric Crouch in the 2002 Rose Bowl and Jason White in the 2004 Sugar Bowl. I know there are many more those are just the ones that come to my mind. Usually the winner of the heisman goes on to either having a bad bowl game or losing the national championship in the bowl game.
exactly, Farmerfan. You forgot Roger Staubach against the Wronghorns in '64

not to mention the suspect pro careers they had have recently.;)

[garlandowl08]

Ok, i figured that, but thats not what I'm asking. I'm not saying it should be changed but if they waited till after the championship game or the other times I suggested, do you think it would have ended differently. It is purely hypothetical. I was talking about this with a friend at school and wanted yalls opinions.

[farmerfan]

Ok, i figured that, but thats not what I'm asking. I'm not saying it should be changed but if they waited till after the championship game or the other times I suggested, do you think it would have ended differently. It is purely hypothetical. I was talking about this with a friend at school and wanted yalls opinions.


If they waited till after the bowl games then Leinart would have two heismans and Vince would win this years heisman. Not to mention Hypuel would have won in 2000 and Dorsey in 2001. In the grand scheme of things the heisman is not all that important, especially now that Vince or some of the other runnerups ended up winning the national championship.

[Drake]

If they waited till after the bowl games then Leinart would have two heismans and Vince would win this years heisman. Not to mention Hypuel would have won in 2000 and Dorsey in 2001. In the grand scheme of things the heisman is not all that important, especially now that Vince or some of the other runnerups ended up winning the national championship.I agree. The Heisman is an individual award in a team game and is awarded to the nation's "Most Outstanding Player" without much if any criteria provided by the awarders to what attributes should be considered to determine who that is...

Since it is the biggest stage, certainly bowl performances influence our feelings on who that player is, but the vote takes place before the bowls and rightfully so... To wait and vote until after the bowls would create an unfair advantage for contenders from schools with higher BCS rankings as they are playing in the bigger and later bowls...

Before the bowls a strong case could be made for Young, Leinart, or Bush... I have no argument with the selection of Reggie Bush whatsoever...

[Mad Hatter]

main thing here is bush has leinart to turn to when things get tough and vise versa....who does vince turn to? No one he took the weight of not just a school, but a State on his very young shoulders and carried Texas to the promise land thats why he should have been the heisman not reggie bush. Reggie proved he was a great player but over hyped. Vince proved he could handle the pressure time and time again. HE and the Longhorns never game up they never said die even when things were grim. Reggie got the Heisman becasue he was in LA he had the media on his side.

[Drake]

main thing here is bush has leinart to turn to when things get tough and vise versa....who does vince turn to? No one he took the weight of not just a school, but a State on his very young shoulders and carried Texas to the promise land thats why he should have been the heisman not reggie bush. Reggie proved he was a great player but over hyped. Vince proved he could handle the pressure time and time again. HE and the Longhorns never game up they never said die even when things were grim. Reggie got the Heisman becasue he was in LA he had the media on his side.I would have had no problem with Vince Young winning either. You gave a plausible reason - he was more valuable to his team - why VY should have gotten it. But what you think makes the "most outstanding player" may be different than the next guy. Whatever it is to the Heisman voters, many more thought Reggie Bush possessed it. Its hard to argue the selection when the criteria for choosing is SO subjective...

Besides, Reggie Bush is not over-hyped. Its a forgone conclusion that he will be selected number #1 in the NFL draft (maybe not if Vince comes out) and many teams wanted the chance to draft him... The NFL makes mistakes but I have to believe, barring injury, that Reggie will meet or exceed expectations at the next level regardless of how high those expectations might be...

[stevefoxsc]

i think bush will be some one we will enjoy watching in the near future he deserved the heismen he sealed it, VY will have his chance next year.

[Dragon20]

I think they should do the vote after the season - remember Jason White after the K-state game what a poor preformance. But he took the pose.

[Drake]

The NFL picks its MVPs before the playoffs for the same reason(s) the Heisman should be selected before the bowls... Too much emphasis would be put on the bowl performance which is unfair for individuals whose teams didn't make or played in lesser bowls...

It would also be unfair to guys that had great seasons but bad bowls because of schemes designed specifically to stop them. Earl Campbell was certainly deserving for his '77 season but was completely shut down in the Cotton Bowl by a Notre Dame team hellbent on not letting him beat them.

If the vote this year had taken place AFTER the Rose bowl I think we could all agree that Vince Young would have won. If that's the case, and we know Reggie Bush won in a landslide before the game, then we can deduce that TOO MUCH emphasis WOULD be put on one game/performance...

It is what it is... A subjective award for the most outstanding individual player during the regular football season... Its hard to argue against most of the list of winners...

[jtk1519]

http://usera.imagecave.com/amchavez/PRB19301050712.jpg

[Tut]

If the Heisman was voted on after the bowls, it would often go to the MVP of the championship game. As it is now, it often goes to the player who looked the best in nationally televised games who had pre-season publicity.